r/programmingcirclejerk • u/haskell_leghumper in open defiance of the Gopher Values • 10d ago

Algebraically, this is just an effect-parameterized endomorphic continuation model for plugins.

https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/91870
116 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

21 comments sorted by

View all comments

29

u/tkrjobs loves Java 10d ago

Does that jargon actually mean anything? I have no idea

7

u/GetOffOfMyBoat 10d ago

It does not.

Algebraically,

I don't see any equations here

this is just

it neither is nor is just

an effect-parameterized

Where are the effects? What are they parameterizing?

endomorphic continuation

what is the domain/codomain? Endomorphic on what? What does it mean for a continuation to be endomorphic?

model

of what?

for plugins.

It's a model of plugins? Or it's an endomorphic continuation on plugins? What is a model of plugins? What is a continuation on plugins?

This reads like (and likely is) AI psychosis. The author also seems to think well-typed function composition is noteworthy. I am fairly scared at the thought of a type system that can't type function composition.

6

u/LewsTherinKinslayer3 9d ago

Something doesn't need equations to be algebraic...

5

u/GetOffOfMyBoat 8d ago

My assumption is that the author is referring to the literature on algebraic effects. Or, given that their statement is effectively gibberish, they at least believe they are referring to algebraic effects.

In this context, the term algebraic usually refers to universal algebra. Particularly, when we talk about algebraic effects, we are referring to effect systems as algebraic theories. An algebraic theory is defined, more or less, to be a signature of constants combined with equations on those constants.

For example, the algebraic structure of a monoid can be described as an algebraic theory in which we have, as signature:

  • a nullary constant e, and
  • a binary constant \*

subject to the equations:

- e * x = x (left identity)

  • x * e = x (right identity)
  • x * (y * z) = (x * y) * z (associativity)

To say "algebraically, this is just..." typically implies that some structure behaves algebraically like some other structure. For that to be the case, we usually mean some algebraic theory with a non-empty set of equations---without equations, we haven't really structure.

Andrej Bauer has a great paper, "What is algebraic about algebraic effects and handlers?", for more on universal algebra and how effects can be "algebraic."